|
Post by Jomo on Jan 24, 2019 7:53:48 GMT
That's nothing to do with the league, that's too do with this rubbish tournament. This is the third season they have been involved. People can understand the difference between the league and this tournament. If you really don’t believe the end goal is B teams in the football league I suggest you look a little harder. The below is a tweet from a Man City youth coach. In which he advocates B team inclusion in the football league and goes on to say it will ‘cause disruption’ but clearly doesn’t care. Supporting this tournament is normalising B teams in the football league structure. Enjoy Wembley if we get there but this simply isn’t for me. View AttachmentView Attachment Interesting to see both Gas and City fans arguing against his views. Sickens me that the top clubs are so greedy that they really could not give a rats arse about the lower league clubs. The EPPP still angers me but that is just accepted now. The removal of emergency loans angers me but it's just accepted now. The inclusion of B teams in the EFL Trophy angers me and it's fast becoming accepted. Can anyone else see where this is going? It's all being geared up towards it. On another point, would Man City be so advocating of B teams in the league structure if they were still in League 1 like they were in 1999? Somehow I don't think so. Now because they have a humongous academy full of so many players they don't know what to do with them, they think they can just bend the lower league clubs over and screw them to further their own selfish greed. I support Rovers and want them to win every game, yet somehow winning this trophy just won't give me the pleasure it would have 4 or 5 years ago. That's sad and it's all the fault of the EFL pandering to the PL club's wishes.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Jan 24, 2019 8:36:40 GMT
That's nothing to do with the league, that's too do with this rubbish tournament. This is the third season they have been involved. People can understand the difference between the league and this tournament. If you really don’t believe the end goal is B teams in the football league I suggest you look a little harder. The below is a tweet from a Man City youth coach. In which he advocates B team inclusion in the football league and goes on to say it will ‘cause disruption’ but clearly doesn’t care. Supporting this tournament is normalising B teams in the football league structure. Enjoy Wembley if we get there but this simply isn’t for me. View AttachmentView AttachmentI've seen that already and the talk from Pep. It's obvious they would like them in the league, that's not the debate lol. The debate is, that this tournament and a boycott of this tournament, won't change that. At the end of the day, if they push for it again, it will come down to money. A boycott will make no difference. I'm 100% against them joining the league, so would boycott, if I thought it would have an impact. I just can't see it. I can dig up articles of the football league saying they won't consider B teams anymore for the league, just national teams. But it's pointless, as money will be the deciding factor. You say owners don't understand. Why did they all vote no already then?? They know how that will make it even harder for them to progress. The football league will know other leagues abroad, don't get the same attendances etc. They are not stupid. The trophy was rubbish, with low attendences already. It's completely different.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Jan 24, 2019 8:47:31 GMT
I've seen that already and the talk from Pep. It's obvious they would like them in the league, that's not the debate lol. The debate is, that this tournament and a boycott of this tournament, won't change that. At the end of the day, if they push for it again, it will come down to money. A boycott will make no difference. Well, then I would suggest the key point is, when Shaun Harvey pipes up at the end of the tournament to say what a success it has been (and you can tell he's not being sincere, because he's speaking) and he uses the attendance to prove what a success it has been, and he says all those who attended the games obviously think it is a good idea, and he says the people have spoken and they support the format, and he says those going to games have proved that it is a popular format, and you realise he's talking about yourself, do you manage not to sick up in your mouth? If you can manage that, then go to the games, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Jan 24, 2019 9:12:49 GMT
If you really don’t believe the end goal is B teams in the football league I suggest you look a little harder. The below is a tweet from a Man City youth coach. In which he advocates B team inclusion in the football league and goes on to say it will ‘cause disruption’ but clearly doesn’t care. Supporting this tournament is normalising B teams in the football league structure. Enjoy Wembley if we get there but this simply isn’t for me. View AttachmentView AttachmentI've seen that already and the talk from Pep. It's obvious they would like them in the league, that's not the debate lol. The debate is, that this tournament and a boycott of this tournament, won't change that. At the end of the day, if they push for it again, it will come down to money. A boycott will make no difference. I'm 100% against them joining the league, so would boycott, if I thought it would have an impact. I just can't see it. I can dig up articles of the football league saying they won't consider B teams anymore for the league, just national teams. But it's pointless, as money will be the deciding factor. You say owners don't understand. Why did they all vote no already then?? They know how that will make it even harder for them to progress. The football league will know other leagues abroad, don't get the same attendances etc. They are not stupid. The trophy was rubbish, with low attendences already. It's completely different. I agree it won't make a difference, however if nobody stood up for what they believe in, because they felt it wouldn't make a difference, then society would never move on. We'd still likely have slavery and women wouldn't have the vote. Of course I'm using extreme examples and this trophy is absolutely irrelevant in comparison, but the point remains that in order to try to make a difference even if the outcome seems inevitable, you need to do what you feel is right even in the knowledge that it is unlikely to make a meaningful difference.
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jan 24, 2019 9:21:15 GMT
Apparently Harvey is doing it to increase interest and........increase crowds. 😂
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Jan 24, 2019 9:40:10 GMT
Apparently Harvey is doing it to increase interest and........increase crowds. 😂 I f**king hate the bloke. He must know when he says 'anything that's different is often being viewed as controversial,' that he's deliberately missing the point. He must know that that's not the reason his tournament is controversial. He must know he's being disingenuous. He must know it's just a load of sh** pouring out of his mouth and dripping down his chin. He must realise that people can see the sh** dripping down his suit. He must know people can see the flecks of diarrhoea staining his shirt. And yet he still sits there smugly. Not sure how he can do it, to be honest. Not sure how someone like that gets to lead the EFL. F**king Sontaran lady garden.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 24, 2019 10:23:29 GMT
Apparently Harvey is doing it to increase interest and........increase crowds. 😂 I f**king hate the bloke. He must know when he says 'anything that's different is often being viewed as controversial,' that he's deliberately missing the point. He must know that that's not the reason his tournament is controversial. He must know he's being disingenuous. He must know it's just a load of sh** pouring out of his mouth and dripping down his chin. He must realise that people can see the sh** dripping down his suit. He must know people can see the flecks of diarrhoea staining his shirt. And yet he still sits there smugly. Not sure how he can do it, to be honest. Not sure how someone like that gets to lead the EFL. F**king Sontaran lady garden. Probably in the Premiership chairman's pockets, but he's hardly a youngster lets see if his replacement says the same if it's not too late by then, although odd somebody I assume who was voted in as chairman by the EFL members seems out of tune with most of their own views?
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Jan 24, 2019 10:32:43 GMT
I f**king hate the bloke. He must know when he says 'anything that's different is often being viewed as controversial,' that he's deliberately missing the point. He must know that that's not the reason his tournament is controversial. He must know he's being disingenuous. He must know it's just a load of sh** pouring out of his mouth and dripping down his chin. He must realise that people can see the sh** dripping down his suit. He must know people can see the flecks of diarrhoea staining his shirt. And yet he still sits there smugly. Not sure how he can do it, to be honest. Not sure how someone like that gets to lead the EFL. F**king Sontaran lady garden. Probably in the Premiership chairman's pockets, but he's hardly a youngster lets see if his replacement says the same if it's not too late by then, although odd somebody I assume who was voted in as chairman by the EFL members seems out of tune with most of their own views? Well, he was chairman at Bradford when they went into administration. He was chief executive of Leeds when they went into administration. He was condemned by OfCom for harassment. Just the sort of person the EFL wanted, for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by scoobydoogas on Jan 24, 2019 13:19:43 GMT
Apparently Harvey is doing it to increase interest and........increase crowds. 😂 I f**king hate the bloke. He must know when he says 'anything that's different is often being viewed as controversial,' that he's deliberately missing the point. He must know that that's not the reason his tournament is controversial. He must know he's being disingenuous. He must know it's just a load of sh** pouring out of his mouth and dripping down his chin. He must realise that people can see the sh** dripping down his suit. He must know people can see the flecks of diarrhoea staining his shirt. And yet he still sits there smugly. Not sure how he can do it, to be honest. Not sure how someone like that gets to lead the EFL. F**king Sontaran lady garden.Ha ha. Funniest thing I've read on here for ages
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Jan 24, 2019 13:33:05 GMT
That interview is so far from reality it is actually unbelievable.
It's actually astonishing how corrupt the EFL is.
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Jan 24, 2019 13:40:39 GMT
I've seen that already and the talk from Pep. It's obvious they would like them in the league, that's not the debate lol. The debate is, that this tournament and a boycott of this tournament, won't change that. At the end of the day, if they push for it again, it will come down to money. A boycott will make no difference. Well, then I would suggest the key point is, when Shaun Harvey pipes up at the end of the tournament to say what a success it has been (and you can tell he's not being sincere, because he's speaking) and he uses the attendance to prove what a success it has been, and he says all those who attended the games obviously think it is a good idea, and he says the people have spoken and they support the format, and he says those going to games have proved that it is a popular format, and you realise he's talking about yourself, do you manage not to sick up in your mouth? If you can manage that, then go to the games, I guess. Again that's this tournament. Attendences in a separate tournament, won't count towards what it will do for the league! They won't be counting me, as I have not attended. Just like I didn't in the last format, until the latter rounds. I don't mind them in this tournament, but it's separate to the league lol.
|
|
|
Post by lastminutewinner on Jan 24, 2019 14:17:07 GMT
Probably in the Premiership chairman's pockets, but he's hardly a youngster lets see if his replacement says the same if it's not too late by then, although odd somebody I assume who was voted in as chairman by the EFL members seems out of tune with most of their own views? Well, he was chairman at Bradford when they went into administration. He was chief executive of Leeds when they went into administration. He was condemned by OfCom for harassment. Just the sort of person the EFL wanted, for some reason.
In an ideal world the teds would take him on in some capacity..
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Jan 24, 2019 14:29:16 GMT
If anyone is interested (or can be bothered), I had quite an argument over email with the EFL about their crap tournament last season. (I started with a fairly annoyed email out of pure frustration, but didn't expect a reply, so I had to get quite serious about it) Get rid of it or get rid of these ridiculous B teams.
Does this article really help your England youth players? www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42246392
Fans are boycotting across country, don't you get the picture?
But let me guess what the reply will be, "clubs voted for the format this season" - but let's look at why! Because you basically bribed them with large cash payments if teams do well. Shouldn't you be REPRESENTING FOOTBALL LEAGUE TEAMS? Take a non-bias stance, don't offer any stupid bonuses, just put out a vote of what clubs want and you'll get your real answer.
Your dictatorship is a disgrace. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Jack, Thank you for your further email regarding the Checkatrade Trophy, we note your comments. In terms of the format, essentially, the reasons for the competition revamp have been communicated extensively since the start of last season (https://www.efl.com/news/2017/may/checkatrade-trophy-competition-gets-backing-from-league-one-and-league-two-clubs/), and all clubs voted on these changes and a continuation of the new format, albeit with some amends for 2017/18. Clubs were free to consult with their own fans regarding the competition changes and progress, and many took comprehensive steps to do so following the successful 2016/17 Final in April. All of this consultation, combined with clubs’ own feedback, was aired and discussed across club meetings to shape the competition. EFL clubs were in agreement that there were clear benefits for them in reinvigorating the competition. Some of the progressive elements of the new structure include benefits regarding player development and financial return. In relation to team selection, the amended criteria for EFL clubs and Category One (invited) sides from 2017/18 is clear in that for EFL clubs, 4 out of 10 (excluding goalkeeper) must be a qualifying outfield Player (defined as having played in the game prior to or after the Checkatrade game, or have achieved a certain number of career appearances). For invited Category One teams the requirement is that six from the starting 11 must be under the age of 21 as at 30 June 2017. Chelsea and Leicester City met that requirement in the fixture you refer/link to. However overall the competition, while not exclusively a 'youth' competition, is having a positive influence in terms of young player exposure to competitive first team football. Five players from the England-U17 World Cup winning squad have featured in this seasons Checkatrade Trophy, continuing the trend from last season, when seven of the England U19 European Championship winning team featured during the tournament. There has also been an increase in young players participating in the Checktrade Trophy this season, with 27.3% of players in Matchdays 1 and 2 being English and Under-21, an increase on the figure from the whole of last season's campaign. Once again, we understand your personal views and recognise that not all fans may have approved of the change of format, however clubs have agreed to the existing arrangements until the end of the 2018/19 season upon which there is likely to be further review. Thank you for contacting the EFL. Regards, Andrew Pomfret------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, You're bending statistics here. Yes, they were communicated but you offered 3 options, where number 1 (the one the EFL wanted let's be honest here) seemed to have a nice cash bonus. That's verging on bribery. Why didn't you offer increasing the competition prize money for option 2? I wonder why... Why isn't there an option that clubs do not have to participate. How about you make it that a club has to apply to be part of this competition, considering it is so prestigious. I wonder how many would apply, how many do you think? Wouldn't that be fairer? In your point regarding a EFL team must play a certain amount of players, why? Why are EFL clubs not allowed the opportunity to play 11 of their youngsters for good first team experience in what is a tantalizing competition? Or does the EFL only care about future players from Premier League teams now? In fact, let's look at the last England first 11 (who you may have heard of) and where they started their careers; Joe Hart (Shrewsbury) Kyle Walker (Sheffield United) Joe Gomez (Charlton) John Stones (Barnsley) Harry Maguire (Sheffield United) Ryan Bertrand (Gillingham) Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea) Jamie Vardy (Sheffield Wednesday) Eric Dier (Sporting CP) Jake Livermore (Tottenham) Marcus Rashford (Manchester United) I have highlighted players from the last England game who are not from Premier League teams. That is 7/11 from EFL teams. Only 3 were actually from Premier League teams. However, if a team did want to give their players the experience, what will happen, they will get a fine because of the one sided dictatorship that the EFL has imposed with this competition.
Now you actually mentioned here about 6/11 must be under 21. Why not 11/11? Do you think it's fair that Chelsea U-21's could host Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas whilst playing Accrington Stanley? Please do not mention the final between Coventry & Oxford as successful. The EFL were lucky to have 2 teams with large followings who wanted to see their team play at Wembley in 1 game. Instead of twisting figures, why don't you look at Coventry & Oxford's average attendances in the league Vs their home attendances in the Checkatrade Trophy. But if you want to put figures in your advantage, I put this to you - How many fans do you think Accrington Stanley Vs Yeovil would attract if it made it to the final? Would it be 70,000? When/If it didn't reach 70,000 fans, would you admit that the tournament wasn't successful? I doubt it. Here's another example, Portsmouth Vs Bristol Rovers - Checkatrade Trophy game. Bristol Rovers made the maximum amount of changes they could. In the 2nd minute, Bristol Rovers made a substitution of goal keepers. Bristol Rovers were then fined for breaching rules of the competition. What was wrong with Bristol Rovers putting a GK on that actually played in the Conference Playoff Final for them? Using the Checkatrade trophy as England's success story for youth football is really clutching at straws here too. When England don't win the World Cup this summer, will you be saying that the tournament failed? When England don't win the Euro's in 2020, will you say the competition was a complete and utter disaster? At the end of the day, look at the real figures - attendances. That will tell you what people really think. In fact, why don't you put a survey out every EFL fan and ask their opinion? Why don't you? We both know why you won't. Looking forward to your reply, Jack----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks for your reply.
The current format of the competition was voted for by our member clubs. The EFL operates a democratic membership structure whereby our members can vote for regulations and competition changes. Collectively, as has been reported, they agreed to one-season trial for 2016/17 and then, following a period of review, a continuation of that format (with some amendments), at the start of this season.
We should clarify that the EFL is not profit making, in the sense that finances are used to run our competitions and to share and distribute prize monies to our members.
The reason why EFL clubs are not permitted to name starting XI of all U21 players is because the Checkatrade Trophy is primarily a first team EFL competition, and in effect, for our clubs it is a continuation of the same competition that came before (Johnstone’s Paint Trophy). Therefore the U21 Category One teams are invited to participate in an EFL competition, hence the rules regarding selection criteria differ. It is important to try to establish a balance but again, this framework was discussed and agreed by our members.
By way of some context, it was accepted that the previous format of the Trophy was struggling and hence, the trial period and prize fund incentive was intended to provide enhanced support to clubs and reinvigorate the competition. The new Checkatrade Trophy format contributed to a prize fund of £1.95 million in the 2016/17 season, compared to the previous season’s £478k. Last season clubs accumulated over £750,000 in prize money from the group stages alone with the introduction of £10,000 for a win and £5,000 for a draw. Around 96% of League One and Two Clubs received prize money in the competition compared to only 52% in the 2015/16 season and this season for the first time 100% of clubs received prize money of some form. Inevitably this is clearly of benefit for clubs and to provide a few examples Peterborough, Lincoln and Forest Green and several others are using these finances to cover such things as first team travel costs for a number of league fixtures, completion of 3G training pitches, contributing to training ground redevelopments, and in enhancing in-stadia catering and entertainment facilities for fans. You can read more about this here www.efl.com/news/2018/january/efl-clubs-benefit-from-checkatrade-trophy/
Of course, we are aware of some of the fan sentiment around the competition and recognise that some attendances last season weren’t where we or our clubs wanted them to be, however there has been a significant increase in attendances this season, with overall like for like attendances up by 17% along with the aforementioned increase in opportunities for young players throughout the game. Naturally the early stages of cup competitions can result in lower attendances than a club would normally get for league fixtures, this being true for other competitions such as in the first and second rounds of the FA Cup for example. In addition, while there have been some notably high attendances in many EFL Trophy finals over the years, this is always impacted by the clubs who reach the final, with some clubs having larger fanbases than others. This is also borne out in our League One and Two Play-Off Final for example.
That said, we have got Checkatrade Trophy competition feedback from supporters by way of our formal structured engagement sessions with representatives of Football Supporters Federation and Supporters Direct, and directly at our Fan Forum events last and this season, and along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Once again thank you for contacting the EFL with your feedback.
Regards, Andrew Pomfret-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, Thanks for getting back to me, firstly I want to thank you for all of your thought through replies - my original email was purely to vent frustration rather than anything else. However, I must comment that I do believe you should go into politics as you have only really answered 1 of my questions and have chosen to point out any positive (where possible) the EFL believes in. Which leads me onto the first point that really, if the EFL really believes that this competition is working so well, then never before have you been further away from the fan base of EFL teams. I accept your answer to why we cannot play younger players in the competition, but you have not addressed as to why these U-21 teams can play 5 players over 21. If it is under 21, it should be U-21. Again, I'd like to refer to my point of the Chelsea squad that can compete in the competition (Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas could all focus in the same game of this competition). Whilst very nice that you have raised competition money, firstly, you have raised the prize money that suit what the EFL wants. Why didn't you raise the prize money for keeping it the same format? I have asked this before, but it was ignored. Now let's look at how this new system really benefits clubs, shall we? To do this, we need to look at a game where it was the same teams playing each other. Luckily enough I managed to find one for you!: Old Format: 7th October 2014. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 5,853. New Format: 2nd December 2017. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 1,780. Difference in fans = 4,073 less. Portsmouth won the game in 2017 meaning the receive £10,000GBP. However, in the old format, if Portsmouth charged just £5 per fan on the difference of attendance (4,073x 5) they would have received £20,365. So not only have you annoyed the fans, you have actually lost Portsmouth money. Never mind if they actually charged people £10 attendance which is probably more likely, which would have been £40,760. So a £30,760 loss for Portsmouth. But the EFL will sing praises how this is better for Portsmouth now to play against 5 players above the age of 21 from the Chelsea squad. If you're looking for suggestions (if you actually are and aren't just nodding along) then here are some (based on the fact that no matter what happens, the EFL will carry on wish this pathetic and insulting format) ; Allow EFL clubs to play whoever they want (after all the competition is for EFL clubs, NOT U-21 clubs) Create a rule that these invited teams can only play players that are 21 or under. Create a rule that these invite teams can only play English players (after all, this was for English youth wasn't it?!) Create an application process, where EFL teams in L1&L2 have to apply to be part of this competition. Those who don't take part will not benefit from the additional prize money & those who do, will benefit from a larger prize fund. If clubs start realizing that certain teams are making millions because others refuse to join, trust me, you'll see the directors of clubs start over-ruling fans & managers and they will enter & actually WANT to take part. Looking forward to hearing from you, Jack-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks again for your feedback and thoughts, we’ll ensure this is passed on to the relevant departments.
As mentioned clubs will no doubt collectively discuss the progress of the competition again at a relevant point in future, and again, along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Should you be a supporter of an EFL club participating in the competition, we would recommend you contact them with your suggestions. They may be able to advise you of their current position, and simultaneously they can feed your comments into their processes going forward.
Thank you again for contacting the EFL.
Regards, Andrew Pomfret
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Jan 24, 2019 14:56:04 GMT
If anyone is interested (or can be bothered), I had quite an argument over email with the EFL about their crap tournament last season. (I started with a fairly annoyed email out of pure frustration, but didn't expect a reply, so I had to get quite serious about it) Get rid of it or get rid of these ridiculous B teams.
Does this article really help your England youth players? www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42246392
Fans are boycotting across country, don't you get the picture?
But let me guess what the reply will be, "clubs voted for the format this season" - but let's look at why! Because you basically bribed them with large cash payments if teams do well. Shouldn't you be REPRESENTING FOOTBALL LEAGUE TEAMS? Take a non-bias stance, don't offer any stupid bonuses, just put out a vote of what clubs want and you'll get your real answer.
Your dictatorship is a disgrace. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Jack, Thank you for your further email regarding the Checkatrade Trophy, we note your comments. In terms of the format, essentially, the reasons for the competition revamp have been communicated extensively since the start of last season (https://www.efl.com/news/2017/may/checkatrade-trophy-competition-gets-backing-from-league-one-and-league-two-clubs/), and all clubs voted on these changes and a continuation of the new format, albeit with some amends for 2017/18. Clubs were free to consult with their own fans regarding the competition changes and progress, and many took comprehensive steps to do so following the successful 2016/17 Final in April. All of this consultation, combined with clubs’ own feedback, was aired and discussed across club meetings to shape the competition. EFL clubs were in agreement that there were clear benefits for them in reinvigorating the competition. Some of the progressive elements of the new structure include benefits regarding player development and financial return. In relation to team selection, the amended criteria for EFL clubs and Category One (invited) sides from 2017/18 is clear in that for EFL clubs, 4 out of 10 (excluding goalkeeper) must be a qualifying outfield Player (defined as having played in the game prior to or after the Checkatrade game, or have achieved a certain number of career appearances). For invited Category One teams the requirement is that six from the starting 11 must be under the age of 21 as at 30 June 2017. Chelsea and Leicester City met that requirement in the fixture you refer/link to. However overall the competition, while not exclusively a 'youth' competition, is having a positive influence in terms of young player exposure to competitive first team football. Five players from the England-U17 World Cup winning squad have featured in this seasons Checkatrade Trophy, continuing the trend from last season, when seven of the England U19 European Championship winning team featured during the tournament. There has also been an increase in young players participating in the Checktrade Trophy this season, with 27.3% of players in Matchdays 1 and 2 being English and Under-21, an increase on the figure from the whole of last season's campaign. Once again, we understand your personal views and recognise that not all fans may have approved of the change of format, however clubs have agreed to the existing arrangements until the end of the 2018/19 season upon which there is likely to be further review. Thank you for contacting the EFL. Regards, Andrew Pomfret------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, You're bending statistics here. Yes, they were communicated but you offered 3 options, where number 1 (the one the EFL wanted let's be honest here) seemed to have a nice cash bonus. That's verging on bribery. Why didn't you offer increasing the competition prize money for option 2? I wonder why... Why isn't there an option that clubs do not have to participate. How about you make it that a club has to apply to be part of this competition, considering it is so prestigious. I wonder how many would apply, how many do you think? Wouldn't that be fairer? In your point regarding a EFL team must play a certain amount of players, why? Why are EFL clubs not allowed the opportunity to play 11 of their youngsters for good first team experience in what is a tantalizing competition? Or does the EFL only care about future players from Premier League teams now? In fact, let's look at the last England first 11 (who you may have heard of) and where they started their careers; Joe Hart (Shrewsbury) Kyle Walker (Sheffield United) Joe Gomez (Charlton) John Stones (Barnsley) Harry Maguire (Sheffield United) Ryan Bertrand (Gillingham) Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea) Jamie Vardy (Sheffield Wednesday) Eric Dier (Sporting CP) Jake Livermore (Tottenham) Marcus Rashford (Manchester United) I have highlighted players from the last England game who are not from Premier League teams. That is 7/11 from EFL teams. Only 3 were actually from Premier League teams. However, if a team did want to give their players the experience, what will happen, they will get a fine because of the one sided dictatorship that the EFL has imposed with this competition.
Now you actually mentioned here about 6/11 must be under 21. Why not 11/11? Do you think it's fair that Chelsea U-21's could host Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas whilst playing Accrington Stanley? Please do not mention the final between Coventry & Oxford as successful. The EFL were lucky to have 2 teams with large followings who wanted to see their team play at Wembley in 1 game. Instead of twisting figures, why don't you look at Coventry & Oxford's average attendances in the league Vs their home attendances in the Checkatrade Trophy. But if you want to put figures in your advantage, I put this to you - How many fans do you think Accrington Stanley Vs Yeovil would attract if it made it to the final? Would it be 70,000? When/If it didn't reach 70,000 fans, would you admit that the tournament wasn't successful? I doubt it. Here's another example, Portsmouth Vs Bristol Rovers - Checkatrade Trophy game. Bristol Rovers made the maximum amount of changes they could. In the 2nd minute, Bristol Rovers made a substitution of goal keepers. Bristol Rovers were then fined for breaching rules of the competition. What was wrong with Bristol Rovers putting a GK on that actually played in the Conference Playoff Final for them? Using the Checkatrade trophy as England's success story for youth football is really clutching at straws here too. When England don't win the World Cup this summer, will you be saying that the tournament failed? When England don't win the Euro's in 2020, will you say the competition was a complete and utter disaster? At the end of the day, look at the real figures - attendances. That will tell you what people really think. In fact, why don't you put a survey out every EFL fan and ask their opinion? Why don't you? We both know why you won't. Looking forward to your reply, Jack----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks for your reply.
The current format of the competition was voted for by our member clubs. The EFL operates a democratic membership structure whereby our members can vote for regulations and competition changes. Collectively, as has been reported, they agreed to one-season trial for 2016/17 and then, following a period of review, a continuation of that format (with some amendments), at the start of this season.
We should clarify that the EFL is not profit making, in the sense that finances are used to run our competitions and to share and distribute prize monies to our members.
The reason why EFL clubs are not permitted to name starting XI of all U21 players is because the Checkatrade Trophy is primarily a first team EFL competition, and in effect, for our clubs it is a continuation of the same competition that came before (Johnstone’s Paint Trophy). Therefore the U21 Category One teams are invited to participate in an EFL competition, hence the rules regarding selection criteria differ. It is important to try to establish a balance but again, this framework was discussed and agreed by our members.
By way of some context, it was accepted that the previous format of the Trophy was struggling and hence, the trial period and prize fund incentive was intended to provide enhanced support to clubs and reinvigorate the competition. The new Checkatrade Trophy format contributed to a prize fund of £1.95 million in the 2016/17 season, compared to the previous season’s £478k. Last season clubs accumulated over £750,000 in prize money from the group stages alone with the introduction of £10,000 for a win and £5,000 for a draw. Around 96% of League One and Two Clubs received prize money in the competition compared to only 52% in the 2015/16 season and this season for the first time 100% of clubs received prize money of some form. Inevitably this is clearly of benefit for clubs and to provide a few examples Peterborough, Lincoln and Forest Green and several others are using these finances to cover such things as first team travel costs for a number of league fixtures, completion of 3G training pitches, contributing to training ground redevelopments, and in enhancing in-stadia catering and entertainment facilities for fans. You can read more about this here www.efl.com/news/2018/january/efl-clubs-benefit-from-checkatrade-trophy/
Of course, we are aware of some of the fan sentiment around the competition and recognise that some attendances last season weren’t where we or our clubs wanted them to be, however there has been a significant increase in attendances this season, with overall like for like attendances up by 17% along with the aforementioned increase in opportunities for young players throughout the game. Naturally the early stages of cup competitions can result in lower attendances than a club would normally get for league fixtures, this being true for other competitions such as in the first and second rounds of the FA Cup for example. In addition, while there have been some notably high attendances in many EFL Trophy finals over the years, this is always impacted by the clubs who reach the final, with some clubs having larger fanbases than others. This is also borne out in our League One and Two Play-Off Final for example.
That said, we have got Checkatrade Trophy competition feedback from supporters by way of our formal structured engagement sessions with representatives of Football Supporters Federation and Supporters Direct, and directly at our Fan Forum events last and this season, and along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Once again thank you for contacting the EFL with your feedback.
Regards, Andrew Pomfret-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, Thanks for getting back to me, firstly I want to thank you for all of your thought through replies - my original email was purely to vent frustration rather than anything else. However, I must comment that I do believe you should go into politics as you have only really answered 1 of my questions and have chosen to point out any positive (where possible) the EFL believes in. Which leads me onto the first point that really, if the EFL really believes that this competition is working so well, then never before have you been further away from the fan base of EFL teams. I accept your answer to why we cannot play younger players in the competition, but you have not addressed as to why these U-21 teams can play 5 players over 21. If it is under 21, it should be U-21. Again, I'd like to refer to my point of the Chelsea squad that can compete in the competition (Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas could all focus in the same game of this competition). Whilst very nice that you have raised competition money, firstly, you have raised the prize money that suit what the EFL wants. Why didn't you raise the prize money for keeping it the same format? I have asked this before, but it was ignored. Now let's look at how this new system really benefits clubs, shall we? To do this, we need to look at a game where it was the same teams playing each other. Luckily enough I managed to find one for you!: Old Format: 7th October 2014. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 5,853. New Format: 2nd December 2017. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 1,780. Difference in fans = 4,073 less. Portsmouth won the game in 2017 meaning the receive £10,000GBP. However, in the old format, if Portsmouth charged just £5 per fan on the difference of attendance (4,073x 5) they would have received £20,365. So not only have you annoyed the fans, you have actually lost Portsmouth money. Never mind if they actually charged people £10 attendance which is probably more likely, which would have been £40,760. So a £30,760 loss for Portsmouth. But the EFL will sing praises how this is better for Portsmouth now to play against 5 players above the age of 21 from the Chelsea squad. If you're looking for suggestions (if you actually are and aren't just nodding along) then here are some (based on the fact that no matter what happens, the EFL will carry on wish this pathetic and insulting format) ; Allow EFL clubs to play whoever they want (after all the competition is for EFL clubs, NOT U-21 clubs) Create a rule that these invited teams can only play players that are 21 or under. Create a rule that these invite teams can only play English players (after all, this was for English youth wasn't it?!) Create an application process, where EFL teams in L1&L2 have to apply to be part of this competition. Those who don't take part will not benefit from the additional prize money & those who do, will benefit from a larger prize fund. If clubs start realizing that certain teams are making millions because others refuse to join, trust me, you'll see the directors of clubs start over-ruling fans & managers and they will enter & actually WANT to take part. Looking forward to hearing from you, Jack-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks again for your feedback and thoughts, we’ll ensure this is passed on to the relevant departments.
As mentioned clubs will no doubt collectively discuss the progress of the competition again at a relevant point in future, and again, along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Should you be a supporter of an EFL club participating in the competition, we would recommend you contact them with your suggestions. They may be able to advise you of their current position, and simultaneously they can feed your comments into their processes going forward.
Thank you again for contacting the EFL.
Regards, Andrew PomfretWell Done Jack. Excellent argument and counterarguments from both sides and was a pleasure to read
|
|
|
Post by chilly1883 on Jan 24, 2019 18:06:10 GMT
If anyone is interested (or can be bothered), I had quite an argument over email with the EFL about their crap tournament last season. (I started with a fairly annoyed email out of pure frustration, but didn't expect a reply, so I had to get quite serious about it) Get rid of it or get rid of these ridiculous B teams.
Does this article really help your England youth players? www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42246392
Fans are boycotting across country, don't you get the picture?
But let me guess what the reply will be, "clubs voted for the format this season" - but let's look at why! Because you basically bribed them with large cash payments if teams do well. Shouldn't you be REPRESENTING FOOTBALL LEAGUE TEAMS? Take a non-bias stance, don't offer any stupid bonuses, just put out a vote of what clubs want and you'll get your real answer.
Your dictatorship is a disgrace. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Jack, Thank you for your further email regarding the Checkatrade Trophy, we note your comments. In terms of the format, essentially, the reasons for the competition revamp have been communicated extensively since the start of last season (https://www.efl.com/news/2017/may/checkatrade-trophy-competition-gets-backing-from-league-one-and-league-two-clubs/), and all clubs voted on these changes and a continuation of the new format, albeit with some amends for 2017/18. Clubs were free to consult with their own fans regarding the competition changes and progress, and many took comprehensive steps to do so following the successful 2016/17 Final in April. All of this consultation, combined with clubs’ own feedback, was aired and discussed across club meetings to shape the competition. EFL clubs were in agreement that there were clear benefits for them in reinvigorating the competition. Some of the progressive elements of the new structure include benefits regarding player development and financial return. In relation to team selection, the amended criteria for EFL clubs and Category One (invited) sides from 2017/18 is clear in that for EFL clubs, 4 out of 10 (excluding goalkeeper) must be a qualifying outfield Player (defined as having played in the game prior to or after the Checkatrade game, or have achieved a certain number of career appearances). For invited Category One teams the requirement is that six from the starting 11 must be under the age of 21 as at 30 June 2017. Chelsea and Leicester City met that requirement in the fixture you refer/link to. However overall the competition, while not exclusively a 'youth' competition, is having a positive influence in terms of young player exposure to competitive first team football. Five players from the England-U17 World Cup winning squad have featured in this seasons Checkatrade Trophy, continuing the trend from last season, when seven of the England U19 European Championship winning team featured during the tournament. There has also been an increase in young players participating in the Checktrade Trophy this season, with 27.3% of players in Matchdays 1 and 2 being English and Under-21, an increase on the figure from the whole of last season's campaign. Once again, we understand your personal views and recognise that not all fans may have approved of the change of format, however clubs have agreed to the existing arrangements until the end of the 2018/19 season upon which there is likely to be further review. Thank you for contacting the EFL. Regards, Andrew Pomfret------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, You're bending statistics here. Yes, they were communicated but you offered 3 options, where number 1 (the one the EFL wanted let's be honest here) seemed to have a nice cash bonus. That's verging on bribery. Why didn't you offer increasing the competition prize money for option 2? I wonder why... Why isn't there an option that clubs do not have to participate. How about you make it that a club has to apply to be part of this competition, considering it is so prestigious. I wonder how many would apply, how many do you think? Wouldn't that be fairer? In your point regarding a EFL team must play a certain amount of players, why? Why are EFL clubs not allowed the opportunity to play 11 of their youngsters for good first team experience in what is a tantalizing competition? Or does the EFL only care about future players from Premier League teams now? In fact, let's look at the last England first 11 (who you may have heard of) and where they started their careers; Joe Hart (Shrewsbury) Kyle Walker (Sheffield United) Joe Gomez (Charlton) John Stones (Barnsley) Harry Maguire (Sheffield United) Ryan Bertrand (Gillingham) Ruben Loftus-Cheek (Chelsea) Jamie Vardy (Sheffield Wednesday) Eric Dier (Sporting CP) Jake Livermore (Tottenham) Marcus Rashford (Manchester United) I have highlighted players from the last England game who are not from Premier League teams. That is 7/11 from EFL teams. Only 3 were actually from Premier League teams. However, if a team did want to give their players the experience, what will happen, they will get a fine because of the one sided dictatorship that the EFL has imposed with this competition.
Now you actually mentioned here about 6/11 must be under 21. Why not 11/11? Do you think it's fair that Chelsea U-21's could host Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas whilst playing Accrington Stanley? Please do not mention the final between Coventry & Oxford as successful. The EFL were lucky to have 2 teams with large followings who wanted to see their team play at Wembley in 1 game. Instead of twisting figures, why don't you look at Coventry & Oxford's average attendances in the league Vs their home attendances in the Checkatrade Trophy. But if you want to put figures in your advantage, I put this to you - How many fans do you think Accrington Stanley Vs Yeovil would attract if it made it to the final? Would it be 70,000? When/If it didn't reach 70,000 fans, would you admit that the tournament wasn't successful? I doubt it. Here's another example, Portsmouth Vs Bristol Rovers - Checkatrade Trophy game. Bristol Rovers made the maximum amount of changes they could. In the 2nd minute, Bristol Rovers made a substitution of goal keepers. Bristol Rovers were then fined for breaching rules of the competition. What was wrong with Bristol Rovers putting a GK on that actually played in the Conference Playoff Final for them? Using the Checkatrade trophy as England's success story for youth football is really clutching at straws here too. When England don't win the World Cup this summer, will you be saying that the tournament failed? When England don't win the Euro's in 2020, will you say the competition was a complete and utter disaster? At the end of the day, look at the real figures - attendances. That will tell you what people really think. In fact, why don't you put a survey out every EFL fan and ask their opinion? Why don't you? We both know why you won't. Looking forward to your reply, Jack----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks for your reply.
The current format of the competition was voted for by our member clubs. The EFL operates a democratic membership structure whereby our members can vote for regulations and competition changes. Collectively, as has been reported, they agreed to one-season trial for 2016/17 and then, following a period of review, a continuation of that format (with some amendments), at the start of this season.
We should clarify that the EFL is not profit making, in the sense that finances are used to run our competitions and to share and distribute prize monies to our members.
The reason why EFL clubs are not permitted to name starting XI of all U21 players is because the Checkatrade Trophy is primarily a first team EFL competition, and in effect, for our clubs it is a continuation of the same competition that came before (Johnstone’s Paint Trophy). Therefore the U21 Category One teams are invited to participate in an EFL competition, hence the rules regarding selection criteria differ. It is important to try to establish a balance but again, this framework was discussed and agreed by our members.
By way of some context, it was accepted that the previous format of the Trophy was struggling and hence, the trial period and prize fund incentive was intended to provide enhanced support to clubs and reinvigorate the competition. The new Checkatrade Trophy format contributed to a prize fund of £1.95 million in the 2016/17 season, compared to the previous season’s £478k. Last season clubs accumulated over £750,000 in prize money from the group stages alone with the introduction of £10,000 for a win and £5,000 for a draw. Around 96% of League One and Two Clubs received prize money in the competition compared to only 52% in the 2015/16 season and this season for the first time 100% of clubs received prize money of some form. Inevitably this is clearly of benefit for clubs and to provide a few examples Peterborough, Lincoln and Forest Green and several others are using these finances to cover such things as first team travel costs for a number of league fixtures, completion of 3G training pitches, contributing to training ground redevelopments, and in enhancing in-stadia catering and entertainment facilities for fans. You can read more about this here www.efl.com/news/2018/january/efl-clubs-benefit-from-checkatrade-trophy/
Of course, we are aware of some of the fan sentiment around the competition and recognise that some attendances last season weren’t where we or our clubs wanted them to be, however there has been a significant increase in attendances this season, with overall like for like attendances up by 17% along with the aforementioned increase in opportunities for young players throughout the game. Naturally the early stages of cup competitions can result in lower attendances than a club would normally get for league fixtures, this being true for other competitions such as in the first and second rounds of the FA Cup for example. In addition, while there have been some notably high attendances in many EFL Trophy finals over the years, this is always impacted by the clubs who reach the final, with some clubs having larger fanbases than others. This is also borne out in our League One and Two Play-Off Final for example.
That said, we have got Checkatrade Trophy competition feedback from supporters by way of our formal structured engagement sessions with representatives of Football Supporters Federation and Supporters Direct, and directly at our Fan Forum events last and this season, and along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Once again thank you for contacting the EFL with your feedback.
Regards, Andrew Pomfret-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Andrew, Thanks for getting back to me, firstly I want to thank you for all of your thought through replies - my original email was purely to vent frustration rather than anything else. However, I must comment that I do believe you should go into politics as you have only really answered 1 of my questions and have chosen to point out any positive (where possible) the EFL believes in. Which leads me onto the first point that really, if the EFL really believes that this competition is working so well, then never before have you been further away from the fan base of EFL teams. I accept your answer to why we cannot play younger players in the competition, but you have not addressed as to why these U-21 teams can play 5 players over 21. If it is under 21, it should be U-21. Again, I'd like to refer to my point of the Chelsea squad that can compete in the competition (Hazard, Kante, Pedro, Morata & Fabregas could all focus in the same game of this competition). Whilst very nice that you have raised competition money, firstly, you have raised the prize money that suit what the EFL wants. Why didn't you raise the prize money for keeping it the same format? I have asked this before, but it was ignored. Now let's look at how this new system really benefits clubs, shall we? To do this, we need to look at a game where it was the same teams playing each other. Luckily enough I managed to find one for you!: Old Format: 7th October 2014. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 5,853. New Format: 2nd December 2017. Portsmouth Vs Northampton. Attendance 1,780. Difference in fans = 4,073 less. Portsmouth won the game in 2017 meaning the receive £10,000GBP. However, in the old format, if Portsmouth charged just £5 per fan on the difference of attendance (4,073x 5) they would have received £20,365. So not only have you annoyed the fans, you have actually lost Portsmouth money. Never mind if they actually charged people £10 attendance which is probably more likely, which would have been £40,760. So a £30,760 loss for Portsmouth. But the EFL will sing praises how this is better for Portsmouth now to play against 5 players above the age of 21 from the Chelsea squad. If you're looking for suggestions (if you actually are and aren't just nodding along) then here are some (based on the fact that no matter what happens, the EFL will carry on wish this pathetic and insulting format) ; Allow EFL clubs to play whoever they want (after all the competition is for EFL clubs, NOT U-21 clubs) Create a rule that these invited teams can only play players that are 21 or under. Create a rule that these invite teams can only play English players (after all, this was for English youth wasn't it?!) Create an application process, where EFL teams in L1&L2 have to apply to be part of this competition. Those who don't take part will not benefit from the additional prize money & those who do, will benefit from a larger prize fund. If clubs start realizing that certain teams are making millions because others refuse to join, trust me, you'll see the directors of clubs start over-ruling fans & managers and they will enter & actually WANT to take part. Looking forward to hearing from you, Jack-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hello Jack,
Thanks again for your feedback and thoughts, we’ll ensure this is passed on to the relevant departments.
As mentioned clubs will no doubt collectively discuss the progress of the competition again at a relevant point in future, and again, along with our clubs we will continue to note all constructive feedback in the context of any future discussions on the competition.
Should you be a supporter of an EFL club participating in the competition, we would recommend you contact them with your suggestions. They may be able to advise you of their current position, and simultaneously they can feed your comments into their processes going forward.
Thank you again for contacting the EFL.
Regards, Andrew Pomfretgood work Jack, very constructive and informative 👏
|
|
|
Post by oldgas on Jan 24, 2019 19:51:23 GMT
I may be a cynic, but I wonder what the chances of Bury and ourselves both getting drawn away in the semi finals would be?
The ideal scenario for Harvey and EFL would be Bury at Sunderland and us at Portsmouth. Better aggregate attendances to boast about, with a hoped-for Wembley final for the home tie victors.
That would ensure a 60+ k attendance and a jizz fest from Harvey.
|
|
|
Post by mjhgas on Jan 24, 2019 20:57:45 GMT
If the B Teams are introduced then there is a real chance that the next Bristol league derby would be against "that lot down the roads" U21's!
Keep up the boycott!
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Jan 24, 2019 22:07:32 GMT
I may be a cynic, but I wonder what the chances of Bury and ourselves both getting drawn away in the semi finals would be?The ideal scenario for Harvey and EFL would be Bury at Sunderland and us at Portsmouth. Better aggregate attendances to boast about, with a hoped-for Wembley final for the home tie victors. That would ensure a 60+ k attendance and a jizz fest from Harvey. Why do you think the draw is only live on the radio and not broadcast live on Sky TV like the last draw???
|
|
|
Post by Jomo on Jan 24, 2019 22:11:23 GMT
Gassy/Jack, you are an absolute hero. Putting forward all of the questions that I would have done if I'd bothered to do so. Thank you, and I'm sure I would also say that on behalf of all lower league fans that share the same sentiment!
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Jan 25, 2019 4:40:34 GMT
Gassy, Jack well done. Your persistence and articulate arguments are to be commended. That you persevered and put together such a strong rebuttal of what the EFL said speaks of your patience. I suppose tbf to the rep from the EFL he also replied well and answered a few of your comments. That he was unable to answer your more particular context-based questions will probably tell you that they have no counter arguments and that much of their position I should pure lay down to financial considerations which are really indefensible. And in a sense he’s probably right in that we need to get the chairmen to vote against this when they get together but as they want money I doubt that will be successful. Well done though to have made sure that Andrew Pomfret at least is aware of the concerns of genuine fans who can see beyond financial considerations. UTG!
|
|